Wind Turbine Payback in Greene County, MS
Wind turbine payback in Greene County
No. The turbine wears out before it pays for itself.
At 30 m, the height a home turbine tower usually reaches, the wind in Greene County, MS averages 3.41 m/s (7.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 3,980 kWh a year, worth $599 at MS's 15.06¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of over 100 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Greene County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Greene County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.9 m/s at the hub against 3.41 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,355 kWh a year here against the turbine's 398, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 126¢/kWh, 8.3 times what MS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.9 m/s instead of 3.41. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MS
Greene County is the 2,607th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MS is DeSoto County at 5.13 m/s, payback 50 years.
Month by month in Greene County
March is the strongest month here, at 3.87 m/s and about 506 kWh. July is the weakest, 2.67 m/s and 147 kWh, so the best month makes 3.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 54% of the year's output in Greene County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.74 m/s | 454 kWh | $68 |
| February | 3.83 m/s | 442 kWh | $67 |
| March | 3.87 m/s | 506 kWh | $76 |
| April | 3.86 m/s | 483 kWh | $73 |
| May | 3.41 m/s | 338 kWh | $51 |
| June | 2.92 m/s | 195 kWh | $29 |
| July | 2.67 m/s | 147 kWh | $22 |
| August | 2.72 m/s | 156 kWh | $23 |
| September | 3.12 m/s | 244 kWh | $37 |
| October | 3.44 m/s | 346 kWh | $52 |
| November | 3.64 m/s | 404 kWh | $61 |
| December | 3.70 m/s | 439 kWh | $66 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Greene County averages 2.27 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.12 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.370, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 2,414 to 7,195 kWh a year, 198% more, before counting the extra cost of the taller tower. Why tower height decides it explains the shear behind these numbers.
| Hub height | Average wind | Output | Payback |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20 m | 2.94 m/s | 2,414 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.41 m/s | 3,982 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.79 m/s | 5,584 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 4.12 m/s | 7,195 kWh | 92 years |
Counties around Greene County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Greene County.
- Perry County, MS: 3.41 m/s, 3,980 kWh, payback over 100 years (21 mi)
- George County, MS: 3.41 m/s, 3,980 kWh, payback over 100 years (25 mi)
- Washington County, AL: 2.9 m/s, 2,315 kWh, payback over 100 years (28 mi)
- Wayne County, MS: 2.92 m/s, 2,370 kWh, payback over 100 years (30 mi)
- Forrest County, MS: 2.93 m/s, 2,398 kWh, payback over 100 years (37 mi)
- Stone County, MS: 2.93 m/s, 2,398 kWh, payback over 100 years (41 mi)
Sun versus wind in Greene County
Greene County gets 4.64 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,355 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 398. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 3.4 times as much here as the turbine. Panel output assumes an 80% system performance ratio. Wind or solar runs the same comparison for every county.
How this is worked out
Wind is NASA's Power climate record, the 2001-2025 average at 10 m and 50 m for the county's centre, carried to 30 m with this county's own measured wind shear and spread into hours with a Rayleigh distribution. The turbine is a generic 10 kW, 7 m rotor machine with 10% losses. Cost is $10,000 per kW installed with no tax credit, because the federal one ended in 2025. One county-centre number cannot see your hilltop or your tree line, so treat it as the starting point for a site survey, not a substitute. The full method and its weak spots are in how the numbers are made.